NRF Curriculum Introduction - CalSWEC



[pic]

“REPRESENTING NON-RESIDENT FATHERS IN CHILD WELFARE PROCEEDINGS”

Instructor’s Guide

Course Introduction

Developed by:

American Bar Association

Center on Children and the Law

740 15th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

on behalf of

The National Quality Improvement Center on

Non-Resident Fathers and the Child Welfare System



Based in part on the ABA Child Law Practice article series commissioned by

the Quality Improvement Center on Non-Resident Fathers

|TITLE: “REPRESENTING NON-RESIDENT FATHERS IN CHILD WELFARE PROCEEDINGS: INTRODUCTION” |

|DURATION OF INSTRUCTION: Thirty-five (35) minutes |

|TRAINER NOTES: |

|This COURSE INTRODUCTION introduces the four (4) lessons within the “REPRESENTING NON-RESIDENT FATHERS IN CHILD WELFARE |

|PROCEEDINGS” training curriculum. |

| |

|Ideally, each of the four course lessons will be presented during a single training event. In such an instance, participant “seat |

|time” is estimated at six hours (trainers should allow for 15 minute breaks between lessons and a 60-minute lunch break, totaling |

|an eight hour training day). Recognizing that the training presentation may need to be altered to accommodate the needs of a |

|variety of audience types and schedules, each of the four lessons have been designed for individual presentation over a series of |

|several weeks. In such cases, participant “seat time” is estimated between 75 and 90 minutes per lesson. |

| |

|The instructor’s scripts, companion presentation slides, and all associated handout materials were designed for presentation by |

|experienced training staff that are comfortable enough with the materials to be able to customize the content to the needs of the |

|participants and the time available. For each discussion topic, scripting is offered to guide the lecture and ensure that key |

|points are covered. Instructor scripts were not designed to be memorized. Rather, these should be used as a guide and expanded to |

|incorporate the trainer’s own knowledge and experience, thus enriching the participant’s class experience. |

|TARGET AUDIENCE: |

|The primary audience will be parents’ attorneys. However, trainers should anticipate attorneys with a range of parent |

|representation experience. Other participants in child welfare proceedings, including non-lawyers, may be invited, such as |

|government attorneys, children’s attorneys or guardians ad litem, along with child welfare agency caseworkers and staff. |

|CURRICULUM RATIONALE: |

|Lawyers appointed to represent non-resident fathers in child protection cases need specialized training that goes beyond their |

|minimum obligations and duties. There is no federal law, and few state laws or court rules that mandate pre-appointment training |

|for lawyers appointed to represent parents, and targeted resources or training can be difficult to find. Attorneys for |

|non-resident fathers have even fewer specific resources and training opportunities available to them. |

| |

|This curriculum will explore the constitutional rights of non-resident fathers in child welfare proceedings and the |

|responsibilities of attorneys who represent them. It will also address best practices for effective advocacy both inside and |

|outside the courtroom. Special ethical considerations for attorneys who represent these fathers will also be addressed. Some of |

|the material presented in these lessons comes from the ABA Child Law Practice article series commissioned by the Quality |

|Improvement Center on Non-Resident Fathers in 2008. By becoming educated about these issues, practitioners will be able to |

|represent their clients more effectively, allowing each client to achieve the best possible outcome for himself and his child(ren).|

|PARTICIPANT REFERENCE MATERIALS: |

|Exercise materials (for example, worksheets or checklists) |

|Slides handouts |

|Reference documents |

|Useful web-links |

|REQUIRED INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS: |

|Presentation slides (on computer disk or overhead transparency) |

|SVGA projector (capable of projecting presentation slides) |

|Laptop or desktop computer (capable of projecting presentation slides) |

|10’x10’ (minimum) projection screen |

|Training facility with required seating |

|Participant handout packages |

|Flip chart(s) and assorted colored markers |

|Curriculum post-test (as appropriate) |

|PRESENTATION METHOD: |

|Lecture and discussion |

|Post-training testing (optional) |

|REQUIRED READING AND RESEARCH (FOR TRAINERS): |

|Research and develop an understanding of the various federal, state, and local laws and regulations regarding non-resident fathers’|

|rights and responsibilities in child welfare proceedings. |

|Research and develop an understanding of the various federal, state, and other assistance programs for non-resident fathers and |

|their child(ren). |

|Read publications specific to the course subject matter: |

|Malm K., Murray J. and Geen R., “What About the Dads?  Child Welfare Agencies’ Efforts to Identify, Locate and Involve Nonresident |

|Fathers,”  Washington, D.C.:  The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and |

|Evaluation, 2006 |

|Malm, K., Zielewski, E. and Chen H, “More about the Dads: Exploring Associations between Nonresident Father Involvement and Child |

|Welfare Case Outcomes,” Washington, D.C.: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for |

|Planning and Evaluation, 2008 |

|National Child Welfare Resource Center for Family-Centered Practice, “Father Involvement. Best Practice/Next Practice: |

|Family-Centered Child Welfare,” Summer 2002. |

|Kendall, Jessica et al., “Engaging Dads in Child Welfare Cases,” 26 ABA Child Law Practice 7, Washington, DC: ABA Center on |

|Children and the Law, 2007. |

|Rauber, D. and Granik, L., “Representing Parents in Child Welfare Cases: A Basic Introduction for Attorney,” Washington, DC: |

|American Bar Association, 2000. |

|ADVANCED PREPARATION (FOR TRAINERS): |

|As appropriate, participants should be informed well in advance if they will be tested and how test results will be used. |

|Read and understand the instructional intent behind each case study, simulation, and exercise. |

|Add jurisdiction-specific information into each presentation where prompted and in other areas where deemed necessary or |

|appropriate |

|Prepare a training workbook for each participant that contains the slides and other handouts for each session, as well as a list of|

|additional background reading participants may wish to obtain. |

|Prepare the training room. |

|For group discussions - Trainers should anticipate participants with a range of previous knowledge and experience. |

|As training progresses, trainers should be prepared to solicit practical experiences from the participants to enrich the training |

|environment. |

|COURSE TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE: |

|Upon completion of the training, and with the aid of reference materials, the participant will be able to more effectively advocate|

|for and represent, both inside and outside of the courtroom, non-resident fathers involved in child welfare proceedings. |

|COURSE ENABLING LEARNING OBJECTIVES: |

|To achieve the terminal performance stated in the Terminal Learning Objective, the participant will: |

|Recognize the importance of father involvement in child welfare proceedings. |

|Define the term “father” (or different types of fathers) in accordance with state and federal statutes. |

|Detail the constitutional rights and responsibilities of fathers in child welfare proceedings. |

|Identify strategies to represent fathers’ expressed wishes and assert their rights inside and outside the courtroom. |

|Describe some of the unique and common ethical responsibilities of attorneys representing fathers in child welfare proceedings. |

| |

|CUES WITHIN THE CURRICULUM AND THEIR MEANINGS: |

| |

|[pic] |[pic] |[pic] | |[pic] |

|Required time (Estimated)|Question and Answer |Slide number to be |[pic] |Link discussion with state or |

| |opportunity |displayed |Class discussion |local law/practice |

| | | | | |

| |

|TRAINING TOPICS: |

| |

|Course Introduction, 35 minutes |

|Lesson One - Asserting the constitutional rights of non-resident fathers with children involved in child welfare proceedings, 90 |

|minutes |

|Lesson Two - Effective strategies to advocate for non-resident fathers outside the courtroom, 90 minutes |

|Lesson Three - Effective strategies to advocate for non-resident fathers inside the courtroom, 90 minutes |

|Lesson Four - Ethical considerations for attorneys representing non-resident fathers, 60 minutes |

|Cue |Subject Outline |Notes |

| | | |

|[pic] |WELCOME, COURSE OVERVIEW, AND INTRODUCTIONS | |

|15 min. | | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Begin the session by welcoming the participants. | |

|Slide 1 | | |

| |Explain the motivation behind this training. | |

| | | |

| |Suggested monologue | |

| |Effective advocacy for non-resident fathers in child welfare cases requires | |

| |knowledge and training different from that required to represent children, agencies,| |

| |or even custodial parents. This population poses unique issues with regard to | |

| |constitutional analyses and arguments their cases require, the ethical obligations | |

| |an attorney has towards them, and the representation they need in and out of court. | |

| |Until recently, very little information or guidance was available for attorneys or | |

| |others concerned with these fathers involvement with the child welfare system. | |

| |Fortunately, federal and state attention has begun to focus on non-resident fathers | |

| |over the past few years. | |

| | | |

| |This five-hour course, designed by the American Bar Association Center on Children | |

| |and the Law, is a product of the National Quality Improvement Center on Non-Resident| |

| |Fathers and the Child Welfare System (QIC), a Department of Health and Human | |

| |Services-funded effort to research the impact of father involvement in child welfare| |

| |proceedings. The QIC is also developing materials, such as this one, to help child | |

| |welfare systems and advocates better engage fathers. | |

| | | |

| |By becoming educated about issues relating to fathers’ roles in child welfare cases,| |

| |attorneys can better represent each client’s interests and achieve the best possible| |

| |outcome for him and his child(ren). | |

| | | |

|[pic] | | |

|Slide 2 | | |

| | | |

| |Make it clear that each participant should have received a participant handout |Display a copy of the |

| |package. Provide a copy to those in need. |handout package as an |

| | |example |

| | | |

| | | |

| |Learning Objectives | |

| | | |

| |Highlight the course learning objectives: | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Recognize the importance of father involvement in child welfare proceedings. |Provide an overview of the|

|Slide 3 |Define the term “father” (or different types of fathers) in accordance with state |listed objectives |

| |and federal statutes. | |

| |Detail the constitutional rights and responsibilities of fathers in child welfare | |

| |proceedings. | |

| |Identify strategies to represent fathers’ expressed wishes and assert their rights | |

| |inside and outside the courtroom. | |

| |Describe some of the unique and common ethical responsibilities of attorneys | |

| |representing fathers in child welfare proceedings. | |

| | | |

| |Clearly state that the participants should leave this training recognizing the | |

| |unique concerns and needs of fathers and armed with practical insight to work | |

| |collaboratively with their clients to make sound decisions and achieve desired | |

| |outcomes. | |

| | | |

| | | |

| |Training Schedule & Logistics | |

| | | |

| |As appropriate, detail the following: | |

|[pic] |The schedule for this training will carry through until approximately ____ (time). | |

|Slide 4 |Lesson One (90 minutes) - Asserting the constitutional rights of non-resident |Provide the dates, times, |

| |fathers with children involved in child welfare proceedings. |and lesson titles for |

| |Lesson Two (90 minutes) - Effective strategies to advocate for non-resident fathers |upcoming trainings in this|

| |outside the courtroom. |curriculum series. |

| |Lesson Three (90 minutes) - Effective strategies to advocate for non-resident | |

| |fathers inside the courtroom. | |

| |Lesson Four (60 minutes) - Ethical considerations for attorneys representing | |

| |non-resident fathers. | |

| |[Note: If the training is being presented as part of a series of sessions on | |

| |different dates (e.g., monthly courthouse brown bags), provide the dates, times and |Note: Fill in the specific|

| |topics for upcoming sessions.] |dates for each lesson |

| |15-minute breaks at ____ (times) |listed on the slide |

| |Lunch and snacks available at ___________________ | |

| |Restrooms __________________________ | |

| |Public telephones _____________________ | |

| |Smoking areas _______________________ | |

| |Break areas _________________________ | |

| |Talk about handouts, flip charts and other note taking materials, exercises, | |

| |learning styles, etc. | |

| |Solicit questions and provide answers | |

| | | |

| | | |

| |Icebreaker - Introduce Trainers And Participants | |

| | | |

| |Ask each trainer to briefly introduce themselves and explain: |Pre-brief the trainers on |

| |Where they work |time available and the |

| |One or two major responsibilities |focus of these |

| |Experiences related to representing fathers |introductions |

| |Expectations of this class | |

| | | |

| |As time allows, ask each participant to briefly introduce themselves and explain: |As time allows, use a flip|

|[pic] |Where they work |chart to maintain a tally |

| |Experiences related to representing fathers |of the extent of the |

| |Expectations of this class |participants’ familiarity |

| | |with the subject matter. |

| |Write participant expectations on the flip chart. Link their expectations to the |Refer to this tally during|

| |specific training objectives. |group discussions. |

| | | |

| | | |

|[pic] |AN OVERVIEW OF THE IMPORTANCE OF BIOLOGICAL FAMILY TIES AND FATHER ABSENTEEISM | |

|10 min. | | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Begin by stating that with declines in marriage, increases in non-marital |Statistics discussed |

|Slide 5 |childbearing, and high rates of divorce and remarriage, an increasing number of U.S.|herein regarding child |

| |children spend substantial portions of their childhoods apart from their biological |welfare trends were taken |

| |fathers. Over twenty-five million American children (or 33.5 percent of children in |from the federal |

| |the U.S.) live without their biological father.[i] These numbers are higher among |government’s most recent |

| |some minority groups. Half of all African-American children (51 percent), one in |annual report on child |

| |four Hispanic children and one in six white children (18 percent) live with single |maltreatment. Please |

| |mothers (U.S. Census Bureau, 2004). A 2006 report on children who had been the |visit the Department of |

| |subject of investigations or assessments by child welfare agencies due to |Health and Human Services |

| |allegations of a caretaker’s abuse or neglect found that the most common living |website for updated |

| |arrangement for children who were abused, neglected, or abandoned was with a single |statistics in future |

| |mother.[ii] |years. |

| | | |

| |Continue by stating that other national trends (like the rising rates of | |

| |incarceration, especially of African American men) have contributed to a diminished | |

| |role of fathers in the daily lives of their children and translate into more | |

| |children in the U.S. living apart from their biological fathers. For these reasons, | |

| |non-resident fathers represent a unique population that requires special | |

| |consideration and have recently sparked a good deal of concern among policy makers. | |

| | | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Ask the participants to respond to the following inquiries. | |

| | | |

| |Question: | |

|[pic] |What are other consequences that result from absent fathers? | |

|Slide 6 |For the child | |

| |For the family |The intent is to cause the|

| |For the father |participants to reflect on|

| |For the community |their case experiences. |

| | | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Explain that research has shown that youth from father-absent homes are more likely |Source: |

|Slide 7 |to experience: |Father Facts, Fifth |

| |Poverty |Edition. Gaithersburg, MD:|

| |Emotional and behavioral problems |National Fatherhood |

| |Substance abuse issues |Initiative (2007). |

| |Incarceration | |

| |Problems at school (e.g., repeating a grade, dropping out, poor performance) | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Explain that for decades, the child welfare system has been criticized for being | |

|Slide 8 |maternal-centered, focusing interventions and services on mothers and not involving | |

| |fathers and their relatives. However, recent statistics reveal that children living | |

| |apart from their fathers are at an increased risk of suffering negative outcomes, | |

| |for example: | |

| |Studies find that the rate of child abuse in single-parent families is nearly twice | |

| |the rate of child abuse in two-parent households.[iii] | |

| |Compared to living with both parents, living in a single-parent home doubles the | |

| |risk that a child will suffer physical, emotional, or educational neglect.[iv] | |

| |Boys who grew up outside of intact marriages were, on average, more than twice as | |

| |likely as other boys to end up in jail.[v] | |

| |Children in father absent homes are five times more likely to be poor.[vi] | |

| |Explain that these and other findings make clear the critical role of fathers in | |

| |their children’s development. | |

| | | |

| | | |

|[pic] |WHY ENGAGING FATHERS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CHILD WELFARE PROCESS IS CRITICAL TO THE | |

|10 min. |PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP, MAKING PLACEMENT OR PERMANENCY DECISIONS, AND GAINING | |

| |ACCESS TO RESOURCES FOR THE CHILD | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Start by stating that non-resident fathers of children in the child welfare system |Direct participants’ |

|Slide 9 |are, unfortunately, often left out of case planning for their children. |attention to the relevant |

| | |handouts: ASPE Issue Brief|

| |Federal government funded research into approximately 1,2000 child welfare cases |and More About the Dads |

| |found that: |(Executive Summary) |

| |Although 88% of fathers names were in the case files, only 55% of fathers had been | |

| |contacted by the agency and only 30% of fathers had visited their children since | |

| |placement | |

| |50% of non-resident fathers who had been contacted (28% of fathers in the study) | |

| |expressed interested in having their child live with them, yet placement with the | |

| |father was the goal in only 4% of cases [vii] | |

| |Children with involved fathers were more likely to be reunified or adopted after | |

| |foster care placement, and children with highly involved fathers exited foster care | |

| |more quickly | |

| |There was no aggregate association between father involvement and subsequent | |

| |maltreatment allegations [viii] | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Generally state that to overlook a father’s involvement is to bypass potential | |

|Slide 10 |social connections and resources that could help achieve permanency for the child. | |

| |Illustrate this by explaining that fathers and their relatives represent half of a | |

| |child’s potential family connections and kin resources. If ignored, important social| |

| |or financial support for the child may be missed. | |

| | | |

| |State that a father and/or relative may: | |

| |Be potential caregivers for the child | |

| |Maintain an important familial connection with the child so that he or she feels | |

| |linked to family (e.g. through regular visitation and other contact) | |

| |Support a reunification plan with child support, respite care or other assistance | |

| |Provide helpful information about the child (e.g., other relatives, health history) | |

| |Voluntarily relinquish parental rights in support of an adoption plan | |

| | | |

| |But without contact with the child welfare agency these potential contributions | |

| |cannot be assessed. Recognizing this, agencies have placed new emphasis on | |

| |identifying, locating, and involving non-resident fathers of children served by the | |

| |child welfare system. | |

| | | |

| |The trends that have led to increasing numbers of U.S. children living apart from |The intent is to “set up” |

| |their fathers have sparked a good deal of concern among policy makers and program |the question (below) by |

| |administrators. A number of shifts in child welfare policies and practices may |allowing the participants |

| |increase the involvement of non-resident fathers in child welfare case planning |to reflect on their |

| |(like the movement towards concurrent case planning, the increasing use of kinship |experiences. |

| |placements, and the growing popularity of family decision-making in case planning). | |

| | | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Ask the participants to respond to the following inquiries. |Record participant |

| | |responses on a flip chart.|

| |Questions: | |

| |What are some examples, from cases you’ve worked on, of how agencies or courts | |

|[pic] |engaged fathers well? | |

|Slide 11 |What are some examples you’ve seen of how father involvement led to better outcomes | |

| |for kids? | |

| |What do you do in your practice to engage dads or to help the agency meet its | |

| |obligations to involve them? | |

| | | |

| | | |

| |CONCLUSION | |

| | | |

| |Summarize by stating that representing these fathers is significant, but difficult | |

| |work – the path is crowded with challenges. Remind the participants that fathers | |

| |come to their attorneys facing the potential loss of their rights to their children.| |

| |At this critical moment, they need clear advice and a zealous advocate. Remind the | |

| |participants that their advocacy must extend to both inside and outside the | |

| |courtroom. | |

| | | |

|[pic] |Conclude by restating that the goal of this curriculum series is to explore the | |

|Slide 12 |constitutional rights of non-resident fathers in child welfare proceedings, examine | |

| |best practice tips for effective advocacy both inside and outside the courtroom, and| |

|[pic] |explore a variety of ethical issues related to representing non-resident fathers. By| |

|35 min Total. |becoming educated about these issues, practitioners will be able to represent their | |

| |clients more effectively, allowing each client to achieve the best possible outcomes| |

| |for their client and his child(ren). | |

| | | |

| | | |

| |Transition to Lesson One | |

-----------------------

[i] Kreider, Rose M. and Jason Fields. Living Arrangements of Children: 2001. Current Populations Reports, p. 70-104. Table 1. Washington, DC.: US Census Bureau, 2005.

[ii] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Child Maltreatment 2006 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2008). ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download